Many people complain about slow broadband, but with the Fibre-to-the-Cabinet
(FTTC) roll-out requiring new street cabinets in addition to the existing ones,
the issue of street clutter is surfacing more and more. St Albans seems to be
the latest area to have problems with locating the new cabinets – The Herts
Advertiser 24 has more detail on what is happening.
There is a duality to this as many people are clamouring for better/faster
broadband, but to improve the communications infrastructure in the UK requires
work being carried in our streets. The old green telephone cabinets have been
in the same location for so many years, that many are now receding into the
background, the new Openreach cabinets are alas larger and with new paint will
be very obvious, and the last few years has seen a rise in people complaining
about street clutter.
Openreach in theory has three options for the FTTC cabinets, but is
favouring the larger cabinet, probably because it gives better capacity for
expansion in the future. Smaller options such as a box mounted on top of an old
cabinet, or a sleeve going over an existing cabinet are possible, but these are
probably only envisaged for cabinets which serve a smaller number of lines.
Even where fibre to the home is being installed using the sewers, there is
still the need for a small trench crossing a property to get the fibre into the
building.
The issue of conservation areas will also impact on FTTC coverage, as it did
in Muswell Hill, St Albans and other places. BT has code powers that means
outside conservation areas they do not need planning permission. The problem is
that the ideal location may be in the conservation area but many of the
properties are outside it. More expensive solutions of course are possible,
such as waterproofing hardware so that it can be located underground, but this
makes general maintenance more expensive.
Test your broadband speed
Follow us on X for the latest broadband news 
You just cant please these people yet the continue to complain about slow speed
FFS, bring them out here, we would love them… hundreds of us on dial up.
Extra off street parking? You mean you want to park your ice cream van on the verge where the BT box will be.
It’s not blocking anything which he owns and I bet the neighbours would rather see a BT box there than a churned up verge and a clapped out van!
I think BT should just walk when they get this **** and put the area to the back of the queue.
Just don’t install them and move on, then pull standard broadband service from the area and everyone that complain’s about having to go back to dialup/3g can be directed at the people that stopped the FTTC install 😀
@Drefsab
Nothing like a good old fashioned mob lynching!
Make them wait until they are the last ones in the country to get it.
What is the matter with people these days.
There’ll be even more uproar then.
IDIOTS
@brutos:What makes you think that the people complaining about the cabinets are the same people complaining about slow access speeds?
There are enough people in most towns to encompass a wide variety of tastes and opinions and not everyone wants faster broadband..or even wants broadband at all.
I say well done to residents for standing up to BT and trying to protect their neighbourhood. At least it shows a little local pride.
I agree with Drefsab! Let the Luddites have 56k and see how long it takes them to change their minds. Might as well give the cabinets to people who want the service. Back of the Q for St Albans 😀
Too many townie NIMBYs who want everthing their own way including superfast broadband but don’t want the visual impact of a large cabinet near their property (heaven forbid it might knock £000’s off the value!)
BT have no choice, the cabinets have to be bigger, the electronics (DSLAM/MSAN with enough VDSL2 slots to service the expected take up + power) that used to be in the exchange now have to be located within the cabinet.
stevecrang – the value of your house is likely to increase if the potential buyer knows superfast broadband is available, a recent survey of house buyers revealed broadband enabled houses can expect higher sale prices than non connected houses.
@Carpetburn
Any operator with code powers would have the same powers as BT regarding not needing planning permission in non-conservation areas.
When I worked for royal mail they had to apply for planning permission for extra pouch boxes for postmen to leave and collect mail from. Planning permission could take up to 3 months.
And then the got vandalized and looked a right mess after a short space of time.
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/telecoms/ioi/e_c_c/ecc_faq/#5
Code powers allow operators to benefit from certain exemptions under Town and Country Planning legislation and also entitles them to carry out street works under the New Road and Street Works Act 1991 without needing to apply for a licence to do so.
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/telecoms/ioi/e_c_c/cp_reg
Register of persons with powers under the Electronic Communications Code
•Virgin Media Limited
•Level 3 Communications Ltd
•UK Broadband Limited
Cabinets can go underground if O2, Sky, TalkTalk etc. customers want to pay more.
I agree with Carpetburn. These are really ugly cabs and have no place in any neighbourhood which has any pride in its apperance. I must admit to being totaly opposed to FTTC-copper to the premises, this is just a halfway solution far better to grab the bull by the horns and go for FTTP and have done with it. More expensive in the short term certinly, but a better overall solution.
The green boxes are ugly but I wouldn’t want to prevent progress, thus many cases a necessary evil.
There are alternatives, but these are going to increase the cost of provision, upkeep and could see more downtime in a fault that takes out underground equipment.
All of this is going to come from somewhere, which is our wallets.
Conservation areas are a toughy. I agree with the locals stance if they want to take it.
Wanrning: look at Virgin Medias response to properties that declined wayleave all those years ago. Not just the back of the queue, but told outright you declined, we decline.
BT’s FTTC is **** anyways.
You just got to make sure your in a VM/i3 area.
Sigh. And it’s because of the NIMBYs no doubt we have very very poor mobile coverage on a relatively modern housing estate too.
If they start the cabinet angle round here I won’t be happy!
cable cabs have to be in about 300M of the end user , so a VM guy told me
Listen to public opinion? The people that appear on Jeremy Kyle are also ‘the public’.
This is what you get http://www.dhmo.org/.
Remember the other cabinet options will have smaller capacity, as less space for VDSL2 line cards.
Comparing VM cab to BT cab solutions, I presume people are aware VM has coax cable to the home with a twisted pair. BT has just twisted pair – though usually two pairs to most properties.
There are times when the public are wrong, this is one of them. I’d hardly call the guys house picturesque anyway
“I must admit to being totaly opposed to FTTC-copper to the premises, this is just a halfway solution far better to grab the bull by the horns and go for FTTP and have done with it.”
FTTP will still need cabs AFAIK
well the guy who told me that VM cabs need to be within 300M of the end user works for them as a network planner so he should know want he is on about.I think it is to do with the TV going over the coax cable.
@Carpetburn, but that’s the thing what if all of the homeowners aren’t happy and it has to be somewhere in that unhappy lots area? Your assuming that someone within a few feet will be happy to have it. People can’t have it both ways, if that area does want faster BB then the cabs have to go somewhere, if they are all moaning minnies then they shouldn’t roll it out there at all, but I’m sure that will be at someones expense
It is my understanding that the FTTC speeds drop very sharply even over a short distance of copper so if your moving cabs further and further away from the properties they’ll just be different complaints, this time about the lack of speed. I can fully understand why some are complaining but something has to give somewhere and its not just one persons decision either, not when it affects the supply to a whole area.
Me, being kind, would offer BT to put the cabinet in my house…Right beside my PC as a matter of fact.
Some tweaking / splicing would not be done. Much. 😀
is another conservation area? ugly green thing outside window? hahahaha. Idiots. BT should say ok no problem keep your crappy slow adsl we will give the service to another area instead.
If I ever a neighbour threatening to “remove it himself”, then I’ll stand up and defend da box!
how can anybody complian about street cabs ..do the people own the pavement i dont think so ..these people should just find something else to moan about ..as long as the cabs dont obstruct peoples front doors or drives ect ..would these people prefer a wacking great exchange in there back yard
Carpet there must have been some amplifiers somewhere on the route, that or it was being fed from an aerial down the road somewhere and distributed via twisted pair, was the operator Rediffusion perhaps?
CATV travels to homes on coax, coax loses signal, so over any distance needs amplification. Amplifiers live on poles, in pedestals or in cabinets but never seen them underground.
Even then the number of amps between customer and fibre has to be fairly low due to the distortion amplification induces on signals, so cabinets need to be fairly close.
Here’s some nice info on ye olde MATV system that predates the CATV networks built in the 80s / 90s / 00s 🙂
http://www.rediffusion.info/TD.80/
Yeah that sounds like that kinda thing Carpet. Those networks distributed an aerial basically and were just strung along from house to house – some amps but stuck on people’s houses along the cable runs 🙂
CATV, sadly, needs multiple instances of amplification or deep fibre optics which means cabinets, pedestals, or kit mounted on poles.
“No thats what others are assuming, i stand by my original view they should ask the street first, if nobody wants it problem solved no box, if some do want it, one of them can have the box outside.” – Agree with that.
BT – If St. Albans do not want to move into the new technological world that we are still struggling to enter – please come to Enfield and help improve performance for those trying to run businesses on a miserable speed, but still be charged the cost of the higher speed rate. I know that most of my customers in the Enfield area will relish a faster speed.
Please don’t bother with St Albans whingers, they are not worth the hastle. Put a couple of boxes in my village of Toft where the so called broad band runs at about 300Kbs most of the time. Aty least we might get what we pay for then.
I’ve got two dirty great big green cabinets outside my place. Who put them there, the water company. Has anybody complained, NO. Why ’cause it stops sewerage backing up in our homes. Please bring another large green cabinet from St Albans to our town, we will be most grateful.
CB – utilities etc. have legal powers that mean they don’t have to ask.
I know what your saying CB, but just for completeness outside your home isn’t your property is it. That is probably the util’s argument, but yes I agree in principal if anything is common courtesy, or they should put in planning permission like you say you have chance to object/have a say
So if the residents of Sizewell say they don’t want a new power station it won’t happen?
We don’t own the road or pavement outside our houses. And you can’t stop anyone who has permission digging up the pavement.
ps. it’s very difficult for councils to refuse planning permission for mobile phone masts.
Carpetburn. He hasn’t got a condition on his home that requires that area outside his home to be free. He has a condition to provide sufficient off road parking and that doesn’t include the verge. The St Albans planning page shows that it is a common condition on anyone who has built an extension in the Ridgeway. It’s a common condition here where on road parking isn’t too much of a problem.
Anyway this is a broadband forum not a planning forum. If they paid me rent they could put one in my garden then the village would finally get the broadband we need.
Even if you don’t have the right to stop someone building on the pavement outside your house they should still consult with you. It’s called common curtesy.
I just don’t understand some of. Do you have no pride in where you live? Is your part of the world so bad that it’s not worth protecting?
..contd. I live on a typical 1990s housing estate and it’s not going to win any design awards. But nonetheless – it’s where I live and I don’t want people and companies messing around with it.
As it happens larger green boxes wouldn’t be much of eyesore to my eyes but that’s not the point. Residents of an area should absolutely be consulted by any organisation making significant changes to street furniture.
It’s their home environment that’s being changed and people have a right to have that respected.
Why is it typical BT? And why should they have had more common sense in this example. To me (an outsider) the positioning looks fine and they are well within their rights to put it there. If that homeowners wall was higher or he had a privet on top of it no-one would be batting an eyelid as the owner wouldn’t be able to see it. His arguement to say its blocking access to his drive is just stupid, unless of course he regularly cuts across that patch of grass and over the pavement?
🙂 Sure but to be fair we (no-one on here) knows what the knock on effect of moving that or any other cab has. Like I say from what I know about VDSL (BT Infinity) the further the cab is sited from premises the lesser the speed, its drops really fast really quick. So whilst FTTH might afford the luxury of siting cabs literally out of site VDSL might not, or not without a hit on the service you get
For example, if the cab is located next to the pole that feeds your home then copper distance is as short as can be. If you move that cab another 10, 20, 30metres+ from the pole it feeds, your copper length increases by that same distance and your connection speed is reduced.
dont these new FTTC cabs have to be close to the existing cab ? as in less then 100m ? the ones i have seen going in are right next to the existing cab.
but if BT do it some will say its wrong LOL
looking at that pic the extsting cab could be as close as 5M to the left and it would not be in the pic.
Might help is someone here did a site visit.
“The road concerned is pretty long with several ideal places for cabinets” and what are you basing that on? Experience as a VDSL Openreach planner? Or just cosmetics.
The latter
But you comment on what you don’t understand, you say there’s a better site for cab just on a cosmetic basis without knowing or understanding what that means on a technical delivery level. These aren’t boxes with fresh air inside they contain services, why do you think you know where they are best suited, you don’t engineers do. You can only comment on how it fits in with someone’s view out of their window. You don’t know or understand where or why these cabs are placed where they are so what value are you adding?
But how do you know if there’s any cost difference (above ground). I’m sure its placed in the best position, the fact that it upsets a property owner is a bad thing (for them) but its probably the best position. I can’t imagine cheapness comes into it, honestly I don’t.
Underground cab’s cost a fortune I believe. Why aren’t you asking the same to Virgin, why aren’t all their cab’s underground? Cost. Every business wants to be cost effective not just BT or in comms I’m talking about any business, you must surely see that?
Talk about splitting hairs, you really are a number. We will have to assume it is in the optimum position and not located there because the planning engineer was having a bad day and didn’t like that guys house. I can’t imagine it costs any more/less moving it up or down the road, burying it underground obviously does and if one option costs more than another ANY business would take the least cost. The majority of arguments you put up against BT is just normal business practice. Again your blind hatred muddy’s common sense
Well if you put it like that, everything is down to cost, for any business that sells any service. I assumed that bit of common sense was already present in your mind, obviously not.
CB – you are trying to prove it’s in the wrong position without knowing any facts other than a newspaper article.
Trolling is best left to the forums.